Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Introduction

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
From Deliberative Democracy to Consent Democracy

  • 61 Accesses

Abstract

Athens in the last third of the fourth century presented an ambivalent picture: on the one hand, the epigraphic, literary, and archaeological evidence testifies to how the economic elite could achieve prominence, prestige, and influence through euergesia. On the other hand, the democratic institutions in which the equality of citizens was manifested appeared more vital than ever before. In contrast to previous research, this study attempts a comprehensive approach through public finance as a determining political factor to analyze the relationship between democracy, the economic elite, and administrative expertise, starting from Weber’s concept of notables (Honoratioren). The aim is to reveal the fundamental changes in Athenian democracy in the roughly hundred years between the fall of the Thirty (403) and the exile of Demetrius of Phalerum (307).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    On Honoratiorenschaft– or more generally on the concentration of power in the hands of an elite – as a fundamental socio-political phenomenon of the (late) Hellenistic period, see Touloumakos (1967) 152–153. Deininger (1971) 17 with further reading. Davies (1981) 303–314. Gauthier (1985). Faraguna (1992) 381–394. Quass (1993). Habicht (1995b). Carsana (1996). Gehrke (2003) 193. Hamon (2007). Scholz (2008).

  2. 2.

    In this respect, the remarks of Schmidt-Hofner (2016) 337–339 are symptomatic, who notes the participation of broad sections of the population in political decision-making processes, and hence estimates the influence of a Honoratioren class to have been low.

  3. 3.

    Mossé (1962) and (1979a). Cf. for example also Bleicken (1995) 479, who assumes an alienation of the wealthy from democracy as a consequence of a perpetual financial shortage and a resignation of the demos, which he interprets as symptoms of a democratic crisis in the fourth century.

  4. 4.

    On euergetism as a form of rule, see Veyne (1976).

  5. 5.

    Rhodes (1980). Bleicken (1987) and (1995) 75–78.

  6. 6.

    This forms one of the main arguments also for a continuity of democracy into the middle of the second century in D. M. Lewis (1984) 57–58 and Habicht (1995b). See also Sect. 1.4 below.

  7. 7.

    Grieb (2008). Carlsson (2010).

  8. 8.

    Even before Grieb (2008) and Carlsson (2010), for example Gauthier (1985) and (1993a). Gruen (1993). Wörrle/Zanker (1995). Ma (1999) and (2003). Gehrke (2003) deconstructed the decadence model and emphasized the vitality of the Hellenistic polis in different aspects.

  9. 9.

    As a representative example, Schmidt-Hofner (2016) 339 cites the argumentative relationship between decline, democracy and Honoratioren: “Von einem schleichenden Verfall der Demokratie kann insofern nicht die Rede sein. Es ist daher auch davon auszugehen, dass die restaurative politische Kultur der Zeit vor und nach 338 von breiten Bevölkerungsschichten in Athen getragen wurde, nicht nur von einer konservativen Honoratiorenschicht.” Schmidt-Hofner thus conceptualizes Honoratioren as a stratum that had a specific mentality and whose genesis he equates with a political crisis. As a symptom of decline, he names a clash of interests among political actors, while vitality is evidenced by a discourse of democracy.

  10. 10.

    Heller (2009).

  11. 11.

    But this is precisely what – implicitly or explicitly – all studies dealing with democracy in the Hellenistic period do; Classical Athens – meaning Periclean Athens – always forms the model of a democracy. So also Mann (2012) 22.

  12. 12.

    Today, a distinction is made between pseudo-democracies, which include, for example, dictatorships in which apparently democratic institutions, such as elections, exist; defective democracies, in which democratic structures exist, though with procedural deficits; and constitutions in which the essential features of democracy (for example, political participation of citizens, equality before the law, free elections, separation of powers) are realized. Nevertheless, even today there is no uniform understanding of democracy, which is why all attempts to measure democracy are always open to debate. – On the use of the term “pseudo-democracy”, see Weber (1917). On the theoretical concept of defective democracies, see Merkel et al. (2003). On democracy measurement, for example, T. Müller/Pickel (2007).

  13. 13.

    Therefore, Nippel (1980) 107 in referring to Weber can claim – although without further substantiating it –, that “die Demokratie [konnte] nicht ohne Honoratioren funktionieren”. Accordingly, he apparently uses a relatively broad concept of Honoratioren. In what follows, however, the term will be used more specifically. See in more detail below Sect. 1.2. On Nippel’s conception see also below Sect. 1.4.

  14. 14.

    Cf. for example Aristoph. Plut. 569. Xen. hell. 6,5,34 and An. 4,7,27.

  15. 15.

    The two terms make clear the collective property idea in which every citizen had a share. See, for instance, on κοινόν Hdt. 7,144,1. Thuc. 6,6,3. 6,17,3. 8,1,2 and on δημόσιον, for instance, Thuc. 6,31,3 and 5. 1,73. Demosth. or. 21,182.

  16. 16.

    See Sect. 2.3.2 below.

  17. 17.

    On tax reliefs as tax expenditures, see Scherf (2011) 13.

  18. 18.

    Cf. Hedtkamp (1980) 75.

  19. 19.

    In 1628, in the Petition of Right, Parliament urged the English King to recognize Parliament’s sovereign right to tax and levy. These rights were incorporated into the Bill of Rights in 1689. In December 1773, the protest of the North American colonists against the fiscal decisions of the British Parliament found expression in the Boston Tea Party. The colonists had long felt it unjust that they should pay taxes on which they themselves could not vote. The distance from the mother country did not allow them to exercise civil rights in elections and directly influence the composition of a representative body. Resistance to this was formed, which as early as 1768 was succinctly subsumed under “no taxation without representation” [London Magazine (August 1768) 89] and demanded the sending of their own deputies. This connection between direct political participation and the sovereign right to taxation was deemd of great importance in the ensuing War of Independence. The formation of representative democracy was therefore closely linked to the development of taxation. Those who paid taxes also wanted to be able to participate in the political decision-making process. See Political Register’s Demophoon: A Dissertation on the original Dispute between Great-Britain and her Colonies (1770) 157. See http://www.notaxationwithoutrepresentation.com/ (last accessed 27/04/2014). – Today, the control of budget remains the most important prerogative of Parliament.

  20. 20.

    Hedtkamp (1980) 75. Schmidt (1980) 120.

  21. 21.

    Schmidt (1980) 120.

  22. 22.

    AO 1977 § 3 para. 1: “Steuern sind Geldleistungen, die nicht eine Gegenleistung für eine besondere Leistung darstellen und von einem öffentlich-rechtlichen Gemeinwesen zur Erzielung von Einnahmen allen auferlegt werden, bei denen der Tatbestand zutrifft, an den das Gesetz die Leistungspflicht knüpft; die Erzielung von Einnahmen kann Nebenzweck sein.”

  23. 23.

    See note 27 below.

  24. 24.

    AO 1977 § 3 para. 1.

  25. 25.

    Schmidt (1980) 121. Scherf (2011) 166.

  26. 26.

    The division into passive and active tax subjects therefore applies only to the non-citizens in Athens, who were compelled to pay taxes without any claim to consideration.

  27. 27.

    Cf. for example the lemmas in the DNP, Dictionnaire de l’Antiquité and in the EAH on the eisphora Schmitz (1997) 930: ‘extraordinary direct tax on wealth’. Bertrand (2005) 1267: ‘l’impôt sur le capital’. Schmitz (2013) 2344: ‘extraordinary direct property-tax’. Garnett (2013a) 4119: ‘emergency tax’. On leiturgia Garnett (2013a) 4119 (on leiturgia of proeisphora): ‘tax’. On metoikion Cartledge (2000b) 104: ‘poll tax’. Jacquemin (2005) 1409: ‘impôt’. Garnett (2013b) 4482: ‘metic-tax’.

  28. 28.

    See below Sect. 2.1.3, note 134.

  29. 29.

    AO 1977 § 3(3): “Einfuhr- und Ausfuhrabgaben […] sind Steuern im Sinne dieses Gesetzes.”

  30. 30.

    Weber (1922a) 141–142: “Hence in the measure in which those who have to work are becoming unable to get away from it, direct democratic administration will tend to turn into rule by notables (honoratiores). We have already met the type as that of the bearer of a special social honor connected with the mode of living. Here we now encounter another indispensable requirement, viz., that capacity to take care of social administration and rule as an honorific duty which derives from economic position. Hence we shall tentatively define honoratiores as follows: Persons who, first, are enjoying an income earned without, or with comparatively little, labor, or at least of such a kind that they can afford to assume administrative functions in addition to whatever business activities they may be carrying on; and who, second, by virtue of such income, have a mode of life which attributes to them the social “prestige” of a status honor and thus renders them fit for being called to rule. Frequently such rule by honoratiores has developed in the form of deliberating bodies in which the affairs to be brought before the community are discussed in advance; such bodies easily come to anticipate the resolutions of the community or to eliminate them and thus to establish, by virtue of their prestige, a monopoly of the honoratiares.” [emphasis in original] – Athens is of no consideration in his argumentation, while he assumes without further justification that in Rome an Honoratiorenschaft of the nobiles was in power, cf. for example Weber (1922a) 182–183, 207 and 551.

  31. 31.

    Weber (1922a) 144 and 354. Their wealth and authority is often – but not exclusively – based on land ownership, ibid. 333 and 343. He locates this type of ‘landlordish’ Honoratioren in Archaic and early Classical times (ibid. 381). – It is in this sense that Nippel (1980) 107 apparently uses the term Honoratioren when he asserts, without further substantiation, that “die Demokratie nicht ohne Honoratioren funktionieren [konnte], die weitgehend für die Politik lebten.”

  32. 32.

    Weber (1922a) 145: “The growing complexity of the administrative tasks and the sheer expansion of their scope increasingly result in the technical superiority of those who have had training and experience, and will thus inevitably favor the continuity of at least some of the functionaries. Hence, there always exists the probability of the rise of a special, perennial structure for administrative purposes, which of necessity means for the exercise of rule. As mentioned before, this structure may be one of honoratiores acting as equal ‘colleagues,’ or it may tum out to be ‘monocratic,’ so that all functionaries are integrated into a hierarchy culminating in one single head.

  33. 33.

    Weber (1922a) 252.

  34. 34.

    However, for Weber, there are different types of Honoratioren depending on which factors (for example, property or knowledge) determine their honor, cf. (1922a) 252. Therefore, there are also Honoratioren armies that claim military honor for themselves (ibid. 272). If military honor is combined with further economic and social criteria, warriors form a Honoratiorenschaft as in Sparta. In the same way, he can speak of “feudal or official Honoratioren” (ibid. 505).

  35. 35.

    Weber (1922a) 177 and 226.

  36. 36.

    Ibid. 142.

  37. 37.

    Ibid. 252.

  38. 38.

    Ibid. 142.

  39. 39.

    The financial sociologist Rudolf Goldscheid (1926) 148 is famous for his dictum according to which “das Budget gleichsam das aller verbrämenden Ideologie entkleidete Gerippe des Staates darstellt”. Cf. also Schumpeter (1918) 4: “Vor allem ist die Finanzgeschichte jedes Volkes ein wesentlicher Teil seiner Geschichte überhaupt: Ein ungeheurer Einfluss auf das Völkerschicksal geht von dem wirtschaftlichen Aderlass aus, den die Bedürfnisse des Staates erzwingen, und von der Art, wie das Ergebnis dieses Aderlasses verwendet wird. Der unmittelbar formende Einfluss der Finanzbedürfnisse und der Finanzpolitik der Staaten weiters auf die Entwicklung der Volkswirtschaft und damit auf alle Lebensformen und Kulturinhalte erklärt in manchen Geschichtsperioden so ziemlich alle großen Züge der Dinge und in den meisten sehr viel davon – nur in wenigen nichts.” Similarly, Bleicken (1995) 291 on ancient conditions: “Manche Bereiche des staatlichen Lebens sind selbst bei grundsätzlich verschiedener Verfassungsform doch gleich oder ähnlich organisiert, wie etwa das Kriegswesen oder Götterkult bei dem Wechsel von einer oligarchischen zu einer demokratischen Regierungsform keiner oder nur geringfügiger Änderung der diesen Bereichen zugrunde liegenden Organisationsprinzipien bedürfen. Andere Gebiete staatlicher Tätigkeit sind hingegen so eng mit der jeweiligen politischen Grundordnung verbunden, dass sie deren Wesen in ihrem formalen Aufbau widerspiegeln und darum auch eine Änderung dieser Ordnung nicht unbeschadet überdauern. Das öffentliche Finanzwesen gehört zu den letzteren […].”

  40. 40.

    Consequently, the focus is solely on public finances at the polis level; the deme level is of only selective relevance to this question.

  41. 41.

    Thuk. 2,13,3. Plut. Aristeides 24,3.

  42. 42.

    Thuk. 1,117,3. IG I3 61 l. 39–42. 369 l. 42. Gabrielsen (2007) 263.

  43. 43.

    IG I3 279.

  44. 44.

    Xen. an. 7,1,27 for the year 432/1. In 432/1 Aristophanes (Vesp. 656–660) even speaks of a total of 2000 talents that arose as income from the arche. See in detail Spielvogel (2001) 105–117. – On the internal revenues cf. for example Aristoph. Vesp. 656–660. IG I3 421–430. Kallet (1998) 44 and 46. – The so-called Thoudippos’ decrees (425/4) then even set (little more than) 1460 talents as tribute, of which, however, not all could be collected. IG I3 71 l. 61–181. Brun (1983) 24. Pritchard (2012) 41. – After all, Athens is said to have collected 1200 talents in the time after the Peace of Nicias (And. 3,8–9), which roughly corresponds to the 1300 talents that Plutarch (Aristeides 24,3) states for the time after the death of Pericles.

  45. 45.

    On the history of Athens in the period between 322 and 307, see Hackl (1987). Habicht (1995a) 47–75. Dreyer (1999) 17–281.

  46. 46.

    Diod. 18,10,1–2.

  47. 47.

    Diod. 18,18,4–5. Plut. Phocion 28,4.

  48. 48.

    Diod. 18,74.

  49. 49.

    See also Sect. 5.6 below.

  50. 50.

    Diod. 18,74,3.

  51. 51.

    Plut. Phocion 8,1–2. See on Phocion PA 15076. Develin (1989) no. 2496. Gehrke (1976). G. A. Lehmann (1997) 32–40.

  52. 52.

    Dreyer (1999) 185.

  53. 53.

    Ibid. 161.

  54. 54.

    Strab. 9,1,20.

  55. 55.

    Dreyer (1999) 184.

  56. 56.

    Property qualification for admission to offices: Aristot. pol. 1291 b 38–41; 1305 a 30–32; 1306 b 1–16; 1317 b 22–23. Property qualification for participation in the assembly: Aristot. pol. 1294 b 2–5. On this, see Blösel (2014), who argues that membership in the upper three property classes as a condition for holding office was never formally abolished in Athens in Classical times. Contra Schmitz (1995b).

  57. 57.

    For example, G. A. Lehmann (1995) 23. Dreyer (1999) 13.

  58. 58.

    On the relationship of philosophy to Demetrius’ legislation, see Gehrke (1978). J. M. Williams (1987).

  59. 59.

    Frg. 34. 132 Wehrli. Gehrke (1978) 173 and 185–186. Cf. Demetrius’ criticism of the choregy (Frg. 136 Wehrli).

  60. 60.

    Hypereides, for example, who was highly esteemed in antiquity, is said to have written more than fifty speeches, of which, however, only six have survived in addition to some fragments. Likewise, Dinarchus is said to have written about sixty speeches, of which actually only three have survived in addition to some fragments. Lysias was even attributed 425 speeches in antiquity, of which 172 titles are known today. See the references below.

  61. 61.

    On Attic orators and Greek rhetoric in general, see Hommel (1981). Kennedy (1994). Worthington (1994). Cole (1995). Poulakos (1995). Kennedy (1996). Usher (2002). Worthington (2007). Habinek (2008).

  62. 62.

    Three speeches and three tetralogies on fictitious murder cases have survived from him. On Antiphon of Rhamnous, who is probably not identical with the sophist of the same name, as Pendrick (2010) 1–26 contra Gagarin (2002) assumes, and his speeches see generally Blass (1887–1898) I 91–203. Paulsen (2011).

  63. 63.

    A total of four speeches by him have survived; two of them are Hellenistic or Roman forgeries (or. 3 and 4). The speech On His Return (or. 2), on the other hand, was delivered in 411, so that only the speech On the Mysteries (or. 1), delivered around 399, which, however, refers to the events of 415, dates from the time after the Peloponnesian War. On Andokides and his speeches, see generally Blass (1887–1898) I 280–339. Missiou (1992). M. Edwards (1995). Gribble (1997). E. M. Harris (2000).

  64. 64.

    As a logographer, the Syracusan metic mainly wrote court orations (exceptions are the epideictic orations or. 2 and 33 and the symbouleutic or. 34), of which 172 titles have survived and 31 are almost complete; the introductions of three other speeches (or. 32–34) are found in Dionysius of Halicarnassus, while the (perhaps spurious) Erotikos (or. 35) is preserved in Plato (Phaidr. 230e–234c). Two speeches are certainly forgeries (or. 6 and 20); five others are disputed as to their authenticity (or. 2. 8. 9. 14. 15). – On Lysias and his speeches see generally Blass (1887–1898) I 339–644. Dover (1968). Weissenberger (1987) and (2003). Bearzot (2007).

  65. 65.

    Of his 64 court speeches, eleven have survived that deal exclusively with inheritance disputes. The titles of more than forty speeches (no longer extant), however, attest to a wider range of topics. For example, a fragment of a twelfth speech that we can grasp today deals with a citizen rights case (Dionys. De Isaio 17). Isaeus contributed significantly to the refinement of Greek rhetoric; his style was innovative and considered exemplary, which is why Demosthenes and Isocrates even adopted various phrases verbatim. – On Isaeus and his speeches, see generally Blass (1887–1898) II 486–577 Avramović (1997). Ferrucci (1998). M. Edwards (2007). Griffith-Williams (2013).

  66. 66.

    From him, 21 speeches and nine letters are preserved, in which Isocrates comments on the political questions and issues of his time. However, he himself never performed as an orator. It is assumed that six of these speeches originate from his logograph activity, while the remaining fifteen were distributed in writing. His speech Antidosis (or. 15) bears autobiographical features. – On Isocrates and his speeches, see generally Blass (1887–1898) II 1–331. Bringmann (1965). Fuks (1972). Walter (1996). Poulakos (1997). Orth (2003). Roth (2003). Walter (2003). Poulakos/Depew (2004). Papilon (2008). Too (2009). C. J. Classen (2010). Blank (2014).

  67. 67.

    In total, the Corpus Demosthenicum comprises 61 speeches, 56 prooimia, and six letters. However, only about fifty speeches and five letters are considered genuine; not by Demosthenes are or. 7. 17. 10 (?). 11. 13. 46. 49. 50. 52. 53. 59. On the speeches of Demosthenes, see generally Blass (1887–1898) III.1. Pearson (1981). Worthington (2000). MacDowell (2009). On his life, Sealey (1993). G. A. Lehmann (1999) and (2004). Samotta (2010). W. Will (2013).

  68. 68.

    Three extensive speeches are preserved by Aeschines, all of which (or. 1 Against Timarchus, 2 On the Embassy, and 3 Against Ctesiphon) were directed against Demosthenes, the counter-speeches on which (Demosth. or. 19 On the False Embassy and 18 On the Crown) we also possess. – On Aeschines and his speeches, see generally Blass (1887–1898) III.2 153–266. Kindstrand (1982). E. M. Harris (1995). Fisher (2007).

  69. 69.

    Only one speech by Lycurgus (Against Leocrates) is complete, fifteen others have survived in fragments. Lycurgus is of the highest importance not so much for his surviving speeches as for his political position and influence on the public finances of Athens. – On him and his speech see generally Blass (1887–1898) III.2 95–135. Conomis (1961s). Salomone (1976). Burke (1977). Spina (1980/81). Humphreys (1985). Vielberg (1991). Worthington/Cooper/E. M. Harris (2001). Humphreys (2004). Whitehead (2006). Engels (2008). Scholz (2009). Azoulay (2011).

  70. 70.

    The speeches of Hypereides, who was highly esteemed in antiquity, have only been preserved on papyrus; of the 77 or 52 speeches recognized as genuine in antiquity, we thus know six almost completely. Further fragments have been preserved, among others, in the so-called Archimedes palimpsest. – On Hypereides and his speeches see generally Blass (1887–1898) III.2 1–95. Worthington (1999). Whitehead (2000). Worthington/Cooper/E. M. Harris (2001). Usher (2002) 328–338. Tchernetska et al. (2007). Care et al. (2008). Bernhardt (2012). Horváth (2014).

  71. 71.

    Of his extensive output – 160 or 61 speeches have been attributed to him – three shorter speeches are extant in connection with the so-called Harpalus Affair (against Demosthenes, Aristogeiton and Philocles). – On Dinarchus and his speeches, see generally Blass (1887–1898) III.2 289–333. Worthington (1992) and (1999). Worthington/Cooper/E. M. Harris (2001).

  72. 72.

    The speeches [Demosth.] or. 45 and 46 (Against Stephanos I and II). 49 (Against Timotheus). 50 (Against Polycles). 52 (Against Callippus). 53 (Against Nicostratus). 59 (Against Neaera) are attributed to Apollodorus. Thus there are more speeches by him than by Andocides or Lycurgus, for example. On Apollodorus and his speeches in general, see Schäfer (1885–1887) IV 130–199. Pearson (1966) Trevett (1992) and the literature cited in Sect. 4.2.2 note 216.

  73. 73.

    [Demosth.] or. 7 (On Halonnesos) and 17 (On the Treaty with Alexander). See on this generally Blass (1887–1898) III.2 135–151.

  74. 74.

    Lys. Frg. 78 Thalheim.

  75. 75.

    [Demosth.] or. 53 (Against Nicostratus).

  76. 76.

    Demosth. or. 27 and 28 (Against Aphobos 1 and 2). Although the speeches of Isaeus (approx. 420–approx. 340) date from this time, more precisely from the period 389–346/5, they provide little relevant information for the present question. Nevertheless, they offer a valuable insight into Attic inheritance and property law, as well as into Athenian economic and social contexts in the elite milieu in general.

  77. 77.

    Number of speeches including spurious ones or those not delivered: Antiphon (6); Andocides (4); Lysias (31); Isocrates (21); Isaeus (12); Lycurgus (1); Hypereides (6); Demosthenes (61); Aeschines (3); Dinarchus (3).

  78. 78.

    Demosthenes was a great admirer of his rhetorical skills (Plut. Demosthenes 5, 1–3. Demosth. or. 18,219), as was Aeschines (2,124). See Hochschulz (2007) 1–3.

  79. 79.

    Demosth. or. 1–17 (1–3 Olynthiacs, 1–4 Philippics, On the Peace, On the Chersonese, On the Symmories also known as On the Relation to the Persian King, On the Liberty of the Rhodians, For the Megalopolitans). Of these, or. 11 (Reply to Philip) and 13 (On Organisation) are spurious or doubtful (or. 10 4. Philip’s Speech); or. 12 is handed down as Letter of Philip, and or. 7 (On Halonnesus) and 17 (On the Treaty with Alexander) are attributed to Hegesippus.

  80. 80.

    Hyp. 6 Funeal Oration. Disputed: Lys. or. 2 Funeral Oration. Demosth. or. 60 Funeral Oration.

  81. 81.

    The first conflict to be carried out in court (Aeschin. or. 1 Against Timarchus and 2 On the False Embassy; Demosth. or. 19 On the False Embassy) arose over the delegation sent to Philip II in 346, which included both Aeschines and Demosthenes and led to the so-called Peace of Philocrates. The two opponents clashed again in court in the aftermath of the crown proposed by Ctesiphon for Demosthenes (Aeschin. or. 3 Against Ctesiphon and Demosth. or. 18 On the Crown).

  82. 82.

    [Aristot.] Ath. pol. 43–62. In what follows it will be assumed that the author of the Athenaion politeia came from the school of Aristotle. Cf. Rhodes (1985a) 58–63.

  83. 83.

    On the Poroi, see Boeckh (1886) I 698–708. Brinkmann (1912). Andreades (1931) 406–416. Schwahn (1931). von der Lieck (1933). Wilhelm (1934). Bodei Giglioni (1970). Frolov (1973). Lauffer (1975). Gauthier (1976). Audring (1978). Gauthier (1984a). Austin/Vidal-Naquet (1984) no. 122. Cataudella (1985). Schütrumpf (1987). Jackson (1990). Roscalla (1990). Dillery (1993). Bloch (2004). Schorn (2006). Jansen (2007). J. Lewis (2009). Schorn (2011). Audring (2012). Schorn (2012).

  84. 84.

    The idea that metics would bring wealth to Athens was a common topos. See Bakewell (1999) especially 10–13. On the “special economic zones” Günther (2016b).

  85. 85.

    On the Oeconomicos, see K. Meyer (1975). Pomeroy (1994). Schefold (2004). Föllinger (2006). Dorion (2008). Nee (2009). Unholtz (2011). Günther (2012b).

  86. 86.

    On the economics of Plato, see Föllinger (2016).

  87. 87.

    On Theophrastus, generally see Regenbogen (1940). Fortenbaugh/Huby/Long (1985). Leppin (2002). Gutas/Lang/Schneider (2016).

  88. 88.

    On Oeconomica in general, see Wilcken (1901). Laurenti (1968). van Groningen/Wartelle (1968). Victor (1983). Isager (1988). Brodersen (2006). Zoepffel (2006). Brodersen (2008). Since all persons mentioned in the second part of the second book were still living at the time of Alexander the Great, the dating to the fourth century proposed by Brodersen (2008) is followed.

  89. 89.

    Polanyi (1957).

  90. 90.

    Cf. Aischin. 3.75. – On the transparency postulate of democracy, see Davies (1994). D. Harris (1994).

  91. 91.

    Crosby (1950).

  92. 92.

    IG II2 1604–1632. – Only the three fragments IG I3 598–600 date from the fifth century (535–410).

  93. 93.

    G. J. Oliver (2007) 1–5. Quass (1993) 19–40 on the development of the Honoratioren, emphasizing the role of honorary decrees in the formation of the Honoratioren class and tracing this development primarily to Athens.

  94. 94.

    Quass (1993).

  95. 95.

    Ibid. 16.

  96. 96.

    Veyne (1976).

  97. 97.

    Ibid. 110.

  98. 98.

    Ibid. 185–327.

  99. 99.

    Ibid. 232.

  100. 100.

    Gauthier (1985).

  101. 101.

    Ibid. 103–120.

  102. 102.

    Habicht (1995a) and (1995b). Fröhlich/Chr. Müller (2005). On the Hellenistic polis and the continuity of democracy in the Hellenistic period, see the research overview by Mann (2012).

  103. 103.

    Cf. the famous opening sentence of Louis Robert (1969): “La cité grecque n’est pas morte à Chéronée.”

  104. 104.

    Grieb (2008). Carlsson (2010). See on these two dissertations Mann (2012) 15–19 and the reviews on Grieb by Horster (2008), Mann (2008), Hamon (2009) 350–351 and Wiemer (2010b) and on Carlsson (2010) by Wiemer (2010a) and Hamon (2009) 349–350 and 380–381.

  105. 105.

    Mann/Scholz (2012).

  106. 106.

    So also Mann (2012) 24.

  107. 107.

    Nippel (1980) 98–123.

  108. 108.

    Ibid. 107.

  109. 109.

    Ibid. On the use of the term Honoratioren in the present context, see the remarks in Sect. 1.2 above.

  110. 110.

    Nippel (1980) 107 at 102.

  111. 111.

    Ibid. 107 note 33.

  112. 112.

    Ibid. 103.

  113. 113.

    Ibid. 102.

  114. 114.

    Ibid. 123.

  115. 115.

    Similarly, Mann (2012) 19–20 states the problem, but he focuses on a concretization of the term “democracy”.

  116. 116.

    Bleicken (1995) 613. On his life and work see generally Irmscher (1971). B. Schneider (1985). Musiolek (1987). Warnke (1987). Horstmann (1988). H. Schneider (1989). Poiss (2009). Nippel (2013b). On the spelling Hackel (2006) 7 note 2.

  117. 117.

    Niebuhr (1811–1832).

  118. 118.

    Bleicken (1995) 613. On Niebuhr and the development of modern classical studies, see Nippel (2009) and (2013a).

  119. 119.

    Warnke (1987).

  120. 120.

    1st edition: 1817; 2nd edition: 1850; authoritative 3rd edition: 1886.

  121. 121.

    Boeckh (1886) I 2: “Und weil beinahe alle Verhältnisse des Staates und der Einzelnen in die große Haushaltung des gemeinen Wesens verschlungen sind, kann weder das Leben des Altertums ohne Kunde seiner Finanzen, noch sein Finanzwesen ohne die genauere Einsicht ins Innere des Staates und öffentlichen Lebens verstanden werden.”

  122. 122.

    On the dispute between Wortphilologie and Sachphilologie, see the fundamental study by C. Lehmann (1964).

  123. 123.

    His judgement on the relation of military in contrast to religious expenditure was and is so influential that Pritchard (2012) took it as an opportunity to once again precisely calculate the costs for both areas. In doing so, he draws on the fundamental study by P. Wilson (2008) for his analysis of urban Dionysia. – An international conference at the Bielefeld ZiF in September 2017 updated Boeckh’s interdisciplinary approach and tested different methodological approaches to the study of Athens’ public finances across disciplinary boundaries. The results appeared in Günther/Rohde (2019).

  124. 124.

    1st ed. 1831; 2nd ed. 1836.

  125. 125.

    1st edition by Schömann: 1855; authoritative 4th edition newly by Lipsius: 1897–1902.

  126. 126.

    Busolt/Swoboda (1920–1926).

  127. 127.

    Beloch (1893–1904) II 336–367 and III 279–330. E. Meyer (1899).

  128. 128.

    E. Meyer (1909). Weber (1907/8).

  129. 129.

    Francotte (1909).

  130. 130.

    Andreades (1931).

  131. 131.

    Original Greek edition, 1st edition 1917, 2nd revised edition 1928, 3rd edition 1931. Andreades died in 1935 at the age of 64 and was unable to complete his wide-ranging enterprise.

  132. 132.

    Cf. for example the review by Hasebroek (1933).

  133. 133.

    Andreades was not a historian, but had studied law and economics in Paris and from 1902 held the only chair of economics in Greece at the University of Athens. It was in this capacity that he decided to write a handbook for students of economics and social science [Andreades (1931) XI]. – After the Treaty of Lausanne in 1923, about one and a half million Greek refugees arrived in Greece from Turkish territories, which led to a considerable increase in Athens’ population. The accompanying problems did not leave Andreades unscathed and directly influenced his interpretation of similarly structured conditions, as he himself noted [Andreades (1931) X]: “Living as we do in times of war and post-war economy, we now better understand the problems posed to the Greek world during and after the Peloponnesian War.”

  134. 134.

    Andreades (1931) 238–259 (Chapter III: Expenditures for the People), esp. 266/7: “Of the latter [the expenditure on the citizens, DR] the most important, that is to say the distributions and payments of money, cannot be judged leniently, for even if we admit that economic reasons (such as the nature of the soil, the competition with foreign countries and with slave labor) as well as the honest administration of the democratic government, imposed the adoption of such measures, we cannot deny that the abuses which accompanied their application were very great and were fatal to the state. More particularly the Theorikon, which was the culmination of the policy initiated by distributions and payments of salaries, was rightly characterized by Boeckh as the chief reason for the state’s fall – as the cancer that caused its death.” – Boeckh (1886) deals with theorika in two places in Volume 1 (pp. 224–226 and 274–287), the most succinct being his formulations on p. 276 (“cancer of Athenian state welfare”) and p. 224: “Durch das Theorikon (τὸ θεωρικόν, τὰ θεωρικά, oder θεωρικὰ χρήματα), die verderblichste Ausgeburt des Perikleischen Zeitalters, entstand in einem kleinen Freistaate eine Verschwendung, welche verhältnismäßig nicht geringer war als an den üppigsten Höfen, und große Summen verschlang, während die Kriege aus Geldmangel verloren gingen.”

  135. 135.

    How English-speaking authors assess the theorika can be seen, moreover, in the translation of the saying by Demades that the theorika were the glue (κόλλα) of democracy (Plut. mor. 1011 b: κόλλα τὰ θεωρικὰ τῆς δημοκρατίας). If modern viewers tend to be more negative, they prefer the rendering of κόλλα as “glue”, otherwise to “cement”, according to Brun (2000) 133.

  136. 136.

    Buchanan (1962).

  137. 137.

    Thus de Ste. Croix (1964) 190 in his review of Buchanan (1962).

  138. 138.

    Bücher (1893). E. Meyer (1895). On the Bücher-Meyer Controversy, see Finley (1979) and H. Schneider (1990). Wagner-Hasel (2011).

  139. 139.

    Finley (1973).

  140. 140.

    Rostovtzeff (1926) and (1941).

  141. 141.

    Finley (1973) 150–153.

  142. 142.

    Silver (2003). On Finley’s influence on the study of the Roman economy, see Ruffing (2015).

  143. 143.

    The basic argumentation was: While the Greek poleis of the fifth century could take on the overpowering Persians, by the fourth century they were incapable of fighting off the “barbarian” danger from the north. The decline weighed all the more heavily because it was self-inflicted, since the Athenians had allowed themselves to be driven into ruin out of laziness and ignorance. Had the Athenians listened to Demosthenes and not neglected their civic duties, had they not been concerned only with their own comfort financed by theorika and gone into battle themselves instead of hiring mercenaries, they could have maintained their military supremacy. – Burckhardt, however, in various studies published in 1995 and 1996 demonstrated that civic participation in military undertakings did not decline; Athens still sent out the entire contingent on certain occasions, cf. for example Demosth. or. 3,35. 4,7–8. 4,19. 4,24. 4,42 and 46. 6,6. 8,21. 9,67. 13,4–5.

  144. 144.

    For example, Mossé (1962) and (1979a).

  145. 145.

    Brun (1983). He paints a particularly bleak picture in his study of war finance (eisphora, syntaxeis and stratiotika) in the almost forty years between the founding of the Second Athenian League (377) and its dissolution after the Battle of Chaeronaea (338). He attributed the loss of autonomy mainly to the fact that the Athenians had not been able to secure their finances in the long term and to put them on an adequate organizational basis in view of the permanent wars.

  146. 146.

    Austin/Vidal-Naquet (1984).

  147. 147.

    Silverman (1994). Gabrielsen (1994).

  148. 148.

    Migeotte (2002). Scheidel/von Reden (2002). Morris/Saller/Scheidel (2007). Bresson (2007–2008 = English translation 2016).

  149. 149.

    Eich (2006).

  150. 150.

    See the overview of current debates in the economic-historical study of ancient Greece Günther (2017b).

  151. 151.

    The exact title is “Was kostet der Krieg? Kriegskosten und Kriegsfinanzierung in der griechisch-römischen Antike von der Gründung des Delisch-Attischen Seebundes bis zur Zeitenwende”. See the website for this project: http://www2.uni-erfurt.de/kriegskosten/ (last accessed 25.03.2015). However, the database has not been updated since July 2009. The project can be compared in approach with the Oxford Roman Economy Project, which was set up at about the same time and aims to clarify the foundations of the Roman economy using quantitative methods (http://oxrep.classics.ox.ac.uk/home/, last accessed 25.03.2015). What both projects have in common is that the presentation of the findings takes precedence over an question-driven interpretation.

  152. 152.

    Burrer/H. Müller (2008).

  153. 153.

    Burrer (2008).

  154. 154.

    Migeotte (2014a).

  155. 155.

    See, for example, Migeotte (1982), (1983), (1984), (1990), (1991), (1992), (1995), (2002), (2008), (2009 = English translation of 2002), (2014a).

  156. 156.

    Pritchard (2012).

  157. 157.

    L. Meier (2012).

  158. 158.

    See the basic remarks by Bonney (1998) or the interdisciplinary and cross-epochal anthology of I. W. Martin/Mehrotra/Prasad (2009), which, however, do not include the ancient world.

  159. 159.

    Sven Günther pursues a similar, multi-perspective approach with his concept of “economic regulatory frameworks”, with which he seeks to capture the political, legal, economic-geographical, social, cultural or religious steering mechanisms of economic action in the fourth century. Cf. for example Günther (2012a), (2012b), (2014a), (2017a) and (2019).

  160. 160.

    Bonney/Ormrod (1999).

  161. 161.

    This assumption of natural growth in public finances has already been criticised. See, for example, Yun-Casalilla (2012).

  162. 162.

    Monson/Scheidel (2015a).

Bibliography

  • Andreades (1931) A. M. Andreades: Geschichte der griechischen Staatswirtschaft. Von der Heroenzeit bis zur Schlacht bei Chaironeia, München 1931 (reprint Hildesheim 1965).

    Google Scholar 

  • Audring (1978) G. Audring: Xenophon, Über die Einkünfte. Aus dem Griechischen übersetzt, JWG19 (1978), 241–254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Audring (2012) G. Audring: Wie kann man Xenophons Schrift über die Staatseinkünfte (Poroi) gerecht werden?, in: P. Seele (ed.): Ökonomie, Politik und Ethik in der praktischen Philosophie der Antike, Berlin/Boston 2012, 15–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Austin/Vidal-Naquet (1984) M. Austin/P. Vidal-Naquet: Gesellschaft und Wirtschaft im alten Griechenland, München 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avramović (1997) S. Avramović: Iseo e il diritto attico, Diáphora 4, Napoli 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  • Azoulay (2011) V. Azoulay: Les métamorphoses du koinon athénien: autour du Contre Léocrate de Lycurgue, in: V. Azoulay/P. Ismard (eds.): Clisthène et Lycurgue d’Athènes, Paris 2011, 191–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakewell (1999) G. Bakewell: Lysias 12 and Lysias 31: Metics and Athenian Citizenship in the Aftermath of the Thirty, GRBS 40 (1999), 5–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bearzot (2007) C. Bearzot: Vivere da democratici. Studi su Lisia e la democrazia ateniese, Roma 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beloch (1893–1904) J. Beloch: Griechische Geschichte, 3 vols., Strassburg 1893–1904.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernhardt (2012) J. Bernhardt: Rhetorische Strategie und politischer Standpunkt bei Hypereides, Hermes 140 (2012), 263–283.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bertrand (2005) J.-M. Bertrand: s.v. liturgie (Grèce), in: J. Leclant (ed.): Dictionnaire de l’Antiquité, Paris 2005, 1267.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blank (2014) T. Blank: Logos und Praxis. Sparta als politisches Exemplum in den Schriften des Isokrates, Klio Beihefte 23, Berlin 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blass (1887–1898) F. Blass: Die attische Beredsamkeit, 4 vols., Leipzig 1887–1898.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bleicken (1987) J. Bleicken: Die Einheit der athenischen Demokratie in klassischer Zeit, Hermes 115 (1987), 257–283.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bleicken (1995) J. Bleicken: Die athenische Demokratie, 4th edition, Paderborn 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloch (2004) D. Bloch: The Date of Xenophon’s Poroi, C&M 55 (2004), 5–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blösel (2014) W. Blösel: Zensusklassen für die Ämterbekleidung im klassischen Griechenland. Wie groß war der verfassungsrechtliche Abstand gemäßigter Oligarchien von der athenischen Demokratie?, in: W. Blösel/W. Schmitz/G. Seelentag/J. Timmer (eds.): Grenzen politischer Partizipation im klassischen Griechenland, Stuttgart 2014, 71–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bodei Giglioni (1970) G. Bodei Giglioni: Xenophontis De Vectigalibus. Introduzione, testo critico, traduzione ed indici, Biblioteca di Studi Superiori 57, Firenze 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boeckh (1886) A. Boeckh: Die Staatshaushaltung der Athener, 3rd edition, Berlin 1886.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonney (1998) R. Bonney: What’s New about the New French Fiscal History?, Journal of Modern History 70 (1998), 639–667.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonney/Ormrod (1999) R. Bonney/W. M. Ormrod: Crises, Revolutions and Self-sustained Growth: Towars a Conceptual Model of Change in Fiscal History, in: W. M. Ormrod/M. Bonney/R. Bonney (eds.): Crises, revolutions and self-sustained growth, Stamford 1999, 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bresson (2007–2008) A. Bresson: L’économie de la Grèce des cités (fin VIe – Ier siècle a. C.), 2 vols., Paris 2007–2008.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bringmann (1965) K. Bringmann: Studien zu den politischen Ideen des Isokrates, Hypomnemata 14, Göttingen/Marburg 1965.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brinkmann (1912) A. Brinkmann: Zu Xenophons Poroi, RhM 67 (1912), 135–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brodersen (2006) K. Brodersen: Aristoteles. 77 Tricks zur Steigerung der Staatseinnahmen, Oikonomiká II. Griechisch/Deutsch, Stuttgart 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brodersen (2008) K. Brodersen: Nützliche Forschung. Ps.-Aristoteles’ Oikonomika IIund die Haushalte griechischer Poleis, in: F. Burrer/H. Müller (eds.): Kriegskosten und Kriegsfinanzierung in der Antike, Darmstadt 2008, 106–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brun (1983) P. Brun: Eisphora – Syntaxis – Stratiotika. Recherches sur les finances militaires d’Athènes au IVe siècle av. J.-C., Centre de recherches d’histoire ancienne 50, Paris 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brun (2000) P. Brun: L’orateur Démade. Essai d’histoire et d’historiographie, Scripta antiqua 3, Pessac 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan (1962) J. J. Buchanan: Theorika. AStudy of Monetary Distributions to the Athenian Citizenry during the Fifth and Fourth Centuries B. C., New York 1962.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bücher (1893) K. Bücher: Die Entstehung der Volkswirtschaft, Tübingen 1893.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke (1977) E. M. Burke: Contra Leocratem and De corona, Phoenix 31 (1977), 330–340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burrer (2008) F. Burrer: Sold und Verpflegungsgeld in klassischer und hellenistischer Zeit, in: F. Burrer./H. Müller (eds.): Kriegskosten und Kriegsfinanzierung in der Antike, Darmstadt 2008, 74–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Busolt/Swoboda (1920–1926) G. Busolt/H. Swoboda: Griechische Staatskunde, 2 vols., München 1920–1926.

    Google Scholar 

  • Care et al. (2008) C. CARE/M. Edwards/Z. Farkas/J. Herrman/L. Horváth/G. Mayer/T. Mészáros/N. Tchernetska/P. J. Rhodes: Fragments of Hyperides’ “Against Diondas” from the Archimedes Palimpsest, ZPE 165 (2008), 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlsson (2010) S. Carlsson: Hellenistic Democracies. Freedom, Independence and Political Procedure in Some East Greek City-States, Stuttgart 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carsana (1996) C. Carsana: Le dirigenze cittadine nello stato seleucidico, Biblioteca di Athenaeum 30, Como 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cartledge (2000b) P. Cartledge: s. v. metoikos, DNP 8 (2000), 104–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cataudella (1985) M. R. Cataudella: Il programma dei Poroi e il problema della copertura finanziaria (III,9), in: F. Broilo (ed.): Xenia, Roma 1985, 37–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • C. J. Classen (2010) C. J. Classen: Herrscher, Bürger und Erzieher. Beobachtungen zu den Reden des Isokrates, Spudasmata 133, Hildesheim/Zürich/New York 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole (1995) T. Cole: The Origins of Rhetoric in Ancient Greece, Ancient Society and History, Baltimore 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conomis (1961) N. Conomis: Notes on the Fragments of Lycurgus, Klio 39 (1961), 72–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crosby (1950) M. Crosby: The Leases of the Laureion Mines, Hesperia 19 (1950), 189–312.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies (1981) J. K. Davies: Wealth and the Power of Wealth in Classical Athens, Salem 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies (1994) J. K. Davies: Accounts and Accountability in Classical Athens, in: R. Osborne/S. Hornblower (eds.): Ritual, Finance, Politics, Oxford 1994, 201–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Ste. Croix (1964) G. E. M. de Ste. Croix: Review of J. J. Buchanan: Theorika. AStudy of Monetary Distributions to the Athenian Citizenry during the Fifth and Fourth Centuries B. C., New York 1964., CR14 (1964), 190–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deininger (1971) J. Deininger: Der politische Widerstand gegen Rom in Griechenland 217–86 v. Chr., Berlin 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Develin (1989) R. Develin: Athenian Officials 684–321 B. C., Cambridge 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dillery (1993) J. D. Dillery: Xenophon’s Poroi and Athenian Imperialism, Historia 42 (1993), 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dorion (2008) L.-A. Dorion: Socrate oikonomikos, in: M. Narcy/A. Tordesillas (eds.): Xénophon et Socrate, Paris 2008, 253–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dover (1968) K. J. Dover: Lysias and the corpus Lysiacum, Sather classical lectures 39, Berkeley 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dreyer (1999) B. Dreyer: Untersuchungen zur Geschichte des spätklassischen Athen (322–ca. 230 v. Chr.), Historia ES 137, Stuttgart 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  • M. Edwards (1995) M. Edwards: Andocides, Greek orators 4, Warminster 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  • M. Edwards (2007) M. Edwards: Isaeus, The Oratory of Classical Greece 11, Austin 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eich (2006) A. Eich: Die politische Ökonomie des antiken Griechenland (6.–3. Jahrhundert v. Chr.), Passauer Historische Forschungen 14, Köln et al. 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engels (2008) J. Engels: Lykurg, Rede gegen Leokrates, hrsg., eingel. und übers. von J. Engels, Darmstadt 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faraguna (1992) M. Faraguna: Atene nell’età di Alessandro. Problemi politici, economici, finanziari, Roma 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrucci (1998) S. Ferrucci: L’Atene di Iseo. L’organizzazione del privato nella prima metà del IVsec. a.C, Studi e testi di storia antica 9, Pisa 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finley (1973) M. I. Finley: The Ancient Economy, Berkeley/Los Angeles 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finley (1979) M. I. Finley (ed.): The Buecher-Meyer Controversy, New York 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher (2007) N. R. E. Fisher: Aeschines: Against Timarchos, Oxford/New York 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Föllinger (2006) S. Föllinger: Sokrates als Ökonom? Eine Analyse der didaktischen Gestaltung von Xenophons Oikonomikos, WJA 30 (2006), 5–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Föllinger (2016) S. Föllinger: Ökonomie bei Platon, Berlin 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fortenbaugh/Huby/Long (1985) W. W. Fortenbaugh/P. M. Huby/A. A. Long (eds.): Theophrastus of Eresus. On His Life and Work, RUSCH 2, New Brunswick/London 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  • Francotte (1909) H. Francotte: Finances des citès grecques, Liège/Paris 1909.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fröhlich/C. Müller (2005) P. Fröhlich/C. Müller (eds.): Citoyenneté et particiption a la basse époque hellénistique, Genf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frolov (1973) E. Frolov: Staat und Ökonomie im Lichte schriftlicher Quellen des 4. Jhs. v.u.Z. Zum Traktat des Xenophon „Über die Einkünfte“, JWG 4 (1973), 175–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuks (1972) A. Fuks: Isokrates and the Social and Economic Situation in Greece, AncSoc 3 (1972), 17–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gabrielsen (1994) V. Gabrielsen: Financing the Athenian Fleet. Public Taxation and Social Relations, Baltimore 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gabrielsen (2007) V. Gabrielsen: Warfare and the State, in: P. Sabin/H. van Wees/M. Whitby (eds.): The Cambridge History of Greek and Roman Warfare, vol. 1: Greece, the Hellenistic World, and the Rise of Rome, Cambridge 2007, 248–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gagarin (2002) M. Gagarin: Antiphon the Athenian. Oratory, Law, and Justice in the Age of the Sophists, Austin 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garnett (2013a) S. Garnett: s. v. Liturgy. Greece and Rome, EAH 8 (2013 a), 4119–4121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garnett (2013b) S. Garnett: s. v. Metoikos, EAH 8 (2013b), 4482.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gauthier (1976) P. Gauthier: Un commentaire historique des Póroi de Xénophon, Hautes études du monde gréco-romaine 8, Genf/Paris 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gauthier (1984a) P. Gauthier: Le programme de Xénophon dans les Poroi, RPh 58 (1984), 181–199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gauthier (1985) P. Gauthier: Les cités grecques et leurs bienfaiteurs (IVe–Ier siècle avant J.-C.). Contribution à l’histoire des institutions, Paris 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gauthier (1993a) P. Gauthier: Les cités hellénistiques, in: M. H. Hansen (ed.): The Ancient Greek City-State, Copenhagen 1993, 211–231.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gehrke (1976) H.-J. Gehrke: Phokion. Studien zur Erfassung seiner historischen Gestalt, Zetemata 64, München 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gehrke (1978) H.-J. Gehrke: Das Verhältnis von Politik und Philosophie im Wirken des Demetrios von Phaleron, Chiron 8 (1978), 149–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gehrke (2003) H.-J. Gehrke: Bürgerliches Selbstverständnis und Polisidentität im Hellenismus, in: K.-J. Hölkeskamp/J. Rüsen/E. Stein-Hölkeskamp/H. T. Grütter (eds.): Sinn (in) der Antike, Mainz 2003, 225–254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldscheid (1926–1929) R. Goldscheid: Staat, öffentlicher Haushalt und Gesellschaft. Wesen und Aufgabe der Finanzwissenschaft vom Standpunkte der Soziologie, in: W. Gerloff/F. Meisel (ed.): Handbuch der Finanzwissenschaft, Tübingen 1926–1929, 146–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gribble (1997) D. Gribble: Rhetoric and History in [Andocides] 4, Against Alcibiades, CQ 45 (1997), 367–391.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grieb (2008) V. Grieb: Hellenistische Demokratie. Politische Organisation und Struktur in freien griechischen Poleis nach Alexander dem Großen, Historia ES 199, Stuttgart 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffith-Williams (2013) B. Griffith-Williams: A Commentary on Selected Speeches of Isaios, Mnemosyne Suppl. 364, Leiden 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gruen (1993) E. S. Gruen: The Polis in the Hellenistic World, in: R. M. Rosen/J. Farrell (eds.): Nomodeiktes. FS Ostwald, Ann Arbor 1993, 339–354.

    Google Scholar 

  • Günther (2012a) S. Günther: Einleitung, in: S. Günther (eds.): Ordnungsrahmen antiker Ökonomien. Ordnungskonzepte und Steuerungsmechnismen antiker Wirtschaftssysteme im Vergleich, Philippika 53, Wiesbaden 2012, 1–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Günther (2012b) S. Günther: Zwischen Theorie und Praxis. Der Perserkönig als idealer Ökonom in Xenophons Schriften, in: S. Günther (ed.): Ordnungsrahmen antiker Ökonomien. Ordnungskonzepte und Steuerungsmechnismen antiker Wirtschaftssysteme im Vergleich, Philippika 53, Wiesbaden 2012, 83–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Günther (2014a) S. Günther: Framing the Financial Thoughts of Aeneas Tacticus: New Approaches of Theory to Economic Discourses in Antiquity, JAC 29 (2014), 77–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Günther (2016b) S. Günther: Sonderwirtschaftszonen. Antike Konzeptionen und Konstruktionen am Beispiel des athenischen Piräus, in: K. Droß-Krüpe/S. Föllinger/K. Ruffing (eds.): Antike Wirtschaft und ihre kulturelle Prägung – The Cultural Shaping of the Ancient Economy, Philippika 98, Wiesbaden 2016, 113–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Günther (2017a) S. Günther: (K)einer neuen Theorie wert? Neues zur Antiken Wirtschaftsgeschichte anhand Dig. 50,11,2 (Callistr. 3 cognit.), Gymnasium 124 (2017), 131–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Günther (2017b) S. Günther: Research Survey: The Ancient Economy – New Studies and Approaches. Ancient Greece, JAC 32 (2017) 69–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Günther (2019) S. Günther: Narrating Checks and Balances? The Setup of Finance-related Administrative Documents and Institutions in 5th and 4th Century BC Athens, in: S. Günther/D. Rohde (eds.): 200 Years after August Boeckh’s „The Public Economy of the Athenians“. Perspectives of Economic History for the 21st Century. Proceedings of an International Workshop held at the ZiF in Bielefeld 2017, JAC 34, Changhun 2019, 211–227.

    Google Scholar 

  • Günther/Rohde (2019) S. Günther/D. Rohde (eds.): 200 Years after August Boeckh’s „The Public Economy of the Athenians“. Perspectives of Economic History for the 21st Century. Proceedings of an International Workshop held at the ZiF in Bielefeld 2017, JAC 34, Changhun 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gutas/Lang/Schneider (2016) D. Gutas/J. Lang/J.-P. Schneider: Théophraste d’Érèse, in: R. Goulet (ed.): Dictionnaire des philosophes antiques 6 (2016), 1034–1123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habicht (1995a) C. Habicht: Athen. Die Geschichte der Stadt in hellenistischer Zeit, München 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habicht (1995b) C. Habicht: Ist ein „Honoratiorenregime“ das Kennzeichen der Stadt im späteren Hellenismus?, in: M. Wörrle/P. Zanker (eds.): Stadtbild und Bürgerbild im Hellenismus, München 1995, 87–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habinek (2008) T. Habinek: Ancient Rhetoric and Oratory, Malden/Oxford 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  • C. Hackel (2006) C. Hackel: Die Bedeutung August Boeckhs für den Geschichtstheoretiker Johann Gustav Droysen. Die Enzyklopädie-Vorlesungen im Vergleich, Würzburg 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • U. Hackl (1987) Hackl: Die Aufhebung der attischen Demokratie nach dem Lamischen Krieg 322 v. Chr., Klio 69 (1987), 58–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamon (2007) P. Hamon: Élites dirigeantes et processus d’aristocratisation à l’époque hellénistique, in: H.-L. Fernoux/C. Stein (eds.): Aristocratie antique. Modèles et exemplarité sociale, Dijon 2007, 79–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamon (2009) P. Hamon: Démocraties grecques après Alexandre: à propos de trois ouvrages récents, Topoi 16 (2009), 347–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D. Harris (1994) D. Harris: Freedom of Information and Accountability. The Inventory Lists of the Parthenon, in: R. Osborne/S. Hornblower (eds.): Ritual, Finance, Politics, Oxford 1994, 213–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • E. M. Harris (1995) E. M. Harris: Aeschines and Athenian Politics, New York 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  • E. M. Harris (2000) E. M. Harris: The Authenticity of Andokides’ De Pace, in: P. Flensted-Jensen/T. H. Nielsen/L. Rubinstein (eds.): Polis & Politics, Copenhagen 2000, 479–505.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hasebroek (1933) J. Hasebroek: Review of A. Andreades: Geschichte der griechischen Staatswirtschaft. Von der Heroenzeit bis zur Schlacht bei Chaironeia, München 1931., HZ148 (1933), 321–323.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedtkamp (1980) G. Hedtkamp: Klassifikation der öffentlichen Einnahmen, in: F. Neumark (ed.): Handbuch der Finanzwissenschaft, Tübingen 1980, 63–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heller (2009) A. Heller: La cité grecque d’époque impériale: vers une société d’ordres?, Annales 64 (2009), 341–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hochschulz (2007) B. Hochschulz: Kallistratos von Aphidnai. Untersuchungen zu seiner politischen Biographie, Quellen und Forschungen zur Antiken Welt 51, München 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hommel (1981) H. Hommel: Griechische Rhetorik und Beredsamkeit, in: E. Vogt (ed.): Griechische Literatur 1981, 337–376.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horster (2008) M. Horster: Review of V. Grieb: Hellenistische Demokratie. Politische Organisation und Struktur in freien griechischen Poleis nach Alexander dem Großen, Historia ES199, Stuttgart 2008, in: H-Soz-Kult, 19.09.2008, http://www.hsozkult.de/publicationreview/id/rezbuecher-10903.

  • Horstmann (1988) A. Horstmann: August Boeckh und die Antike-Rezeption im 19. Jahrhundert, in: K. Christ/A. Momigliano (eds.): L’Antichità nell’Ottocento in Italia e Germania, Bologna/Berlin 1988, 39–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horváth (2014) L. Horváth: Der neue Hypereides. Textedition, Studien und Erläuterungen, Texte und Kommentare 50, Berlin 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  • Humphreys (1985) S. C. Humphreys: Lycurgus of Butadae, in: C. G. Starr/J. W. Eadie/J. Ober (eds.): The Craft of the Ancient Historian, Lanham 1985, 199–252.

    Google Scholar 

  • Humphreys (2004) S. C. Humphreys: Lycurgus of Boutadai: An Athenian Aristocrat, in: S. C. Humphreys (ed.): The Strangeness of Gods, Oxford/New York 2004, 77–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Irmscher (1971) J. Irmscher: August Böckh und seine Bedeutung für die Entwicklung der Altertumswissenschaft, JWG 2 (1971), 107–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Isager (1988) S. Isager: Once Upon a Time. On the Interpretation of [Aristotle], Okonomika II, in F. Zimmer (ed.): Studies in Ancient History and Numismatics, Aarhus 1988, 77–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson (1990) D. F. Jackson: The Manuscripts of Xenophon’s Poroi, SIFC 83 (1990), 166–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacquemin (2005) A. Jacquemin: s. v. Métèque, in: J. Leclant (ed.): Dictionnaire de l’Antiquité, Paris 2005, 1409–1410.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jansen (2007) J. N. Jansen: After Empire. Xenophon’s Poroi and the Reorientation of Athens Political Economy, Diss. University of Texas at Austin 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kallet (1998) L. Kallet: Accounting for Culture in Fifth-Century Athens, in: D. Boedeker/K. A. Raaflaub (eds.): Democracy, Empire, and the Arts in Fifth-Century Athens, Cambridge/London 1998, 43–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy (1994) G. Kennedy: A New History of Classical Rhetoric, Princeton 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy (1996) G. Kennedy: The Art of Persuasion in Greece, Ann Arbor 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kindstrand (1982) J. F. Kindstrand: The Stylistic Evaluation of Aeschines in Antiquity, Studia Graeca Upsaliensia 18, Stockholm 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lauffer (1975) S. Lauffer: Das Bergbauprogramm in Xenophons Poroi, in: H. F. Mussche/P. Spitaels/F. Goemaere-De Poerck (eds.): Thorikos and the Laurion in Archaic and Classical Times, Ghent 1975, 171–194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laurenti (1968) R. Laurenti: Studi sull’Economico attribuito ad Aristotele, Milano 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  • C. Lehmann (1964) C. Lehmann: Die Auseinandersetzung zwischen Wort- und Sachphilologie in der deutschen Klassischen Altertumswissenschaft des 19. Jahrhunderts, Diss. HU Berlin 1964.

    Google Scholar 

  • G. A. Lehmann (1995) G. A. Lehmann: Überlegungen zu den oligarchischen Machtergreifungen im Athen des 4. Jahrhunderts v. Chr., in: W. Eder (ed.): Die athenische Demokratie im 4. Jahrhundert v. Chr. Vollendung oder Verfall einer Verfassungsform?, Stuttgart 1995, 139–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • G. A. Lehmann (1997) G. A. Lehmann: Oligarchische Herrschaft im klassischen Athen. Zu den Krisen und Katastrophen der attischen Demokratie im 5. und 4. Jahrhundert v. Chr, Nordrhein-Westfälische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Vorträge G 346, Opladen 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  • G. A. Lehmann (1999) G. A. Lehmann: Demosthenes, in: K. Brodersen (ed.): Große Gestalten der griechischen Antike, München 1999, 201–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • G. A. Lehmann (2004) G. A. Lehmann: Demosthenes von Athen. Ein Leben für die Freiheit, München 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leppin (2002) H. Leppin: Theophrasts „Charaktere“ und die Bürgermentalität in Athen im Übergang zum Hellenismus, Klio 84 (2002), 37–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • D. M. Lewis (1984) D. M. Lewis: Democratic Institutions and Their Diffusion, reprint in: D. M. Lewis.: Selected Papers in Greek and Near Eastern History, ed. by P. J. Rhodes, Cambridge 1997, 51–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • J. Lewis (2009) J. Lewis: Poroi, in: D. A. Gish/W. Ambler (eds.): The Political Thought of Xenophon, Exeter 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ma (1999) J. Ma: Antiochos III and the Cities of Western Asia Minor, Oxford 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ma (2003) J. Ma: Peer polity interaction in the Hellenistic Age, PP 180 (2003), 9–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacDowell (2009) D. M. MacDowell: Demosthenes the Orator, Oxford/New York 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mann (2008) C. Mann: Review of V. Grieb: Hellenistische Demokratie. Politische Organisation und Struktur in freien griechischen Poleis nach Alexander dem Großen, Historia ES199, Stuttgart 2008, in: sehepunkte 8 (2008), Nr. 9, 15.09.2008, http://www.sehepunkte.de/2008/09/13931.html.

  • Mann (2012) C. Mann: Gleichheiten und Ungleichheiten in der hellenistischen Polis: Überlegungen zum Stand der Forschung, in: C. Mann/P. Scholz (eds.): „Demokratie“ im Hellenismus, Mainz 2012, 11–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mann/Scholz (2012) C. Mann/P. Scholz (eds.): „Demokratie“ im Hellenismus, Mainz 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  • I. W. Martin/Mehrotra/Prasad (2009) I. W. Martin/A. K. Mehrotra/M. Prasad (eds.): The New Fiscal Sociology. Taxation in Comparative and Historical Perspective, Cambridge 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  • L. Meier (2012) L. Meier: Die Finanzierung öffentlicher Bauten in der hellenistischen Polis, Die hellenistische Polis als Lebensform 3, Berlin 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merkel et al. (2003) W. Merkel/H.-J. Puhle/A. Croissant/C. Eicher/P. Thiery: Defekte Demokratie, vol. 1: Theorien, Opladen 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • E. Meyer (1895) E. Meyer: Die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung des Altertums. Ein Vortrag, gehalten auf der dritten Versammlung deutscher Historiker in Frankfurt a. M. am 20. April 1895, reprint in: E. Meyeeer: Kleine Schriften, Jena 1910, 79–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • E. Meyer (1899) E. Meyer: Zur Geschichte der attischen Finanzen im fünften Jahrhundert, in: E. Meyer: Forschungen zur Alten Geschichte, vol. 2: Zur Geschichte des fünften Jahrhunderts v. Chr., Halle 1899, 88–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • E. Meyer (1909) E. Meyer: Griechische Finanzen, in: J. Conrad/L. Elster/W. Lexis/E. Loening (eds.): Handwörterbuch der Staatswissenschaften, Jena 1909, 134–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • K. Meyer (1975) K. Meyer: Xenophons “Oikonomikos”. Übersetzung und Kommentar, Marburg 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  • Migeotte (1982) L. Migeotte: Épigraphie et littérature grecques: L’exemple des souscriptions publiques, CEA 14 (1982), 47–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Migeotte (1983) L. Migeotte: Souscriptions Athéniennes de la période classique, Historia 32 (1983), 129–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Migeotte (1984) L. Migeotte: L’emprunt public dans les cités grecques. Recueil des documents et analyse critique, Québec/Paris 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  • Migeotte (1990) L. Migeotte: Le pain quotidien dans les cités hellénistiques. Une “affaire d’Etat”?, Cahiers des études anciennes 24 (1990), 291–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Migeotte (1991) L. Migeotte: Le pain quotidien dans les cités hellénistiques. Àpropos des fonds permanents pour l’approvisionnement en grain, CCG 2 (1991), 19–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Migeotte (1992) L. Migeotte: Les souscriptions publiques dans les cités grecques, Genf/Quebec 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  • Migeotte (1995) L. Migeotte: Les finances publiques des cités grecques: bilan et perspectives de recherche, Topoi 5 (1995), 7–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Migeotte (2002) L. Migeotte: Les finances des cités grecques. Aux périodes classique et hellénistique, Paris 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Migeotte (2008) L. Migeotte: Kriegs- und Verteidigungsfinanzierung in den hellenistischen Städten, in: F. Burrer/H. Müller (eds.): Kriegskosten und Kriegsfinanzierung in der Antike, Darmstadt 2008, 151–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Migeotte (2009) L. Migeotte: The Economy of the Greek Cities. From the Archaic Period to the Early Roman Empire, Berkeley 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  • Migeotte (2014a) L. Migeotte: Les finances des cités grecques, Paris 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  • Missiou (1992) A. Missiou: The Subversive Oratory of Andokides. Politics, Ideology, and Decision-Making in Democratic Athens, Cambridge 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monson/Scheidel (2015a) A. Monson/W. Scheidel (eds.): Fiscal Regimes and the Political Economy of Premodern States, Cambridge 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris/Saller/Scheidel (2007) I. Morris/R. P. Saller/W. Scheidel: Introduction, in: I. Morris/R. P. Saller/W. Scheidel (eds.): The Cambridge Economic History of The Greco-Roman World, Cambridge 2007, 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mossé (1962) C. Mossé: La fin de la démocratie athénienne. Aspects sociaux et politiques du déclin de la cité grecque au IVe siècle avant J.-C., Paris 1962.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mossé (1979a) C. Mossé: Der Zerfall der athenischen Demokratie (404–86 v. Chr.), Zürich/München 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  • H. Müller (2008) H. Müller: Gesandtschaftsgeschenke im Kontext kriegerischer Auseinandersetzungen im Altertum, in: F. Burrer/H. Müller (eds.): Kriegskosten und Kriegsfinanzierung in der Antike, Darmstadt 2008, 91–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • T. Müller/Pickel (2007) T. Müller/S. Pickel: Wie lässt sich Demokratie am besten messen? Zur Konzeptqualität von Demokratieindizes, Politische Vierteljahresschrift 48 (2007), 511–539.

    Google Scholar 

  • Musiolek (1987) P. Musiolek: August Boeckh und die antike Wirtschaftsgeschichte, Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin 36 (1987), 26–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nee (2009) L. Nee: Oeconomicus, in: D. A. Gish/W. Ambler (eds.): The Political Thought of Xenophon, Exeter 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niebuhr (1811–1832) B. G. Niebuhr: Römische Geschichte, Berlin 1811–1832.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nippel (1980) W. Nippel: Mischverfassungstheorie und Verfassungsrealität in Antike und früher Neuzeit, Geschichte und Gesellschaft. Bochumer Historische Studien 21, Stuttgart 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nippel (2009) W. Nippel: Barthold Georg Niebuhr und die Begründung der modernen Althistorie, in: A. M. Baertschi/C. G. King (eds.): Die modernen Väter der Antike: Die Entwicklung der Altertumswissenschaften an Akademie und Universität im Berlin des 19. Jahrhunderts, Berlin 2009, 87–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nippel (2013a) W. Nippel: Barthold Georg Niebuhr und die Begründung der modernen Althistorie, Forschungen zur Brandenburgischen und Preußischen Geschichte 23 (2013), 165–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nippel (2013b) W. Nippel: Boeckhs Beitrag zur Alten Geschichte, in: C. Hackel/S. Seifert (eds.): August Boeckh, Berlin 2013, 45–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • G. J. Oliver (2007) G. J. Oliver: War, Food, and Politics in Early Hellenistic Athens, Oxford 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orth (2003) W. Orth (ed.): Isokrates. Neue Ansätze zur Bewertung eines politischen Schriftstellers, Trier 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Papilon (2008) T. L. Papilon: Isocrates, in: I. Worthington (ed.): A Companion to Greek Rhetoric, Malden 2008, 58–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulsen (2011) T. Paulsen: Antiphon von Rhamnus, in: B. Zimmermann (ed.): Handbuch der griechischen Literatur der Antike, vol. 1: Die griechische Literatur der archaischen und klassischen Zeit, München 2011, 436–439.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson (1966) L. Pearson: Apollodorus, the Eleventh Orator, in: L. Wallach (ed.): The Classical Tradition, Ithaca 1966, 347–359.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson (1981) L. Pearson: The Art of Demosthenes, Chico 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pendrick (2010) G. J. Pendrick: Antiphon the Sophist, the Fragments, Cambridge Classical Texts and Commentaries 39, Cambridge 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poiss (2009) T. Poiss: Die unendliche Aufgabe. August Boeckh als Begründer des Philologischen Seminars, in: A. M. Baertschi/C. G. King (eds.): Die modernen Väter der Antike: Die Entwicklung der Altertumswissenschaften an Akademie und Universität im Berlin des 19. Jahrhunderts, Berlin 2009, 45–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polanyi (1957) K. Polanyi: Aristotle Discovers the Economy, in: K. Polanyi/C. M. Arensberg/H. W. Pearson (eds.): Trade and Market in the Early Empires: Economies in History and Theory, Glencoe 1957, 64–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pomeroy (1994) S. B. Pomeroy: Xenophon: Oeconomicus. A Social and Historical Commentary, Oxford 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poulakos (1995) J. Poulakos: Sophistical Rhetoric in Classical Greece, Studies in Rhetoric/Communication, Columbia 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poulakos (1997) T. Poulakos: Speaking for the polis. Isocrates’ Rhetorical Education, Studies in Rhetoric & Communication, Columbia 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poulakos/Depew (2004) T. Poulakos/D. Depew (eds.): Isocrates and Civic Education, Austin 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pritchard (2012) D. M. Pritchard: Costing Festivals and War. Spending Priorities of the Athenian Democracy, Historia 61 (2012), 18–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quass (1993) F. Quass: Die Honoratiorenschicht in den Städten des griechischen Ostens: Untersuchungen zur politischen und sozialen Entwicklung in hellenistischer und römischer Zeit, Stuttgart 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  • Regenbogen (1940) O. Regenbogen: s. v. Theophrastos von Eresos, RE Suppl. 7 (1940), 1354–1562.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes (1980) P. J. Rhodes: Athenian Democracy after 403 B. C., CJ 75 (1980), 305–323.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes (1985a) P. J. Rhodes: A Commentary on the Aristotelian Athenaion Politeia, Oxford 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robert (1969) L. Robert: Théophane de Mytilène à Constantinople, CRAI 113 (1969), 42–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roscalla (1990) F. Roscalla: Influssi antistenici nell’Economico di Senofonte, Prometheus 16 (1990), 207–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rostovtzeff (1926) M. I. Rostovtzeff: The Social and Economic History of the Roman Empire, Oxford 1926.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rostovtzeff (1941) M. I. Rostovtzeff: The Social and Economic History of the Hellenistic World, Oxford 1941.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth (2003) P. Roth: Der Panathenaikos des Isokrates. Übersetzung und Kommentar, Beiträge zur Altertumskunde 196, München 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruffing (2015) K. Ruffing: Von der primitivistischen Orthodoxie zum römischen Basar. Die Wirtschaft des Römischen Reiches in der Forschung des ausgehenden 20. und des beginnenden 21. Jahrhunderts, in: R. Lafer/K. Strobel (eds.): Antike Lebenswelten. Althistorische und papyrologische Studien, Berlin/Boston 2015, 3–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salomone (1976) S. Salomone: L’impegno etico e la morale di Licurgo, A&R 21 (1976), 41–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Samotta (2010) I. Samotta: Demosthenes, Tübingen/Basel 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schäfer (1885–1887) A. Schäfer: Demosthenes und seine Zeit, Leipzig 1885–1887 (reprint Hildesheim 1966).

    Google Scholar 

  • Schefold (2004) B. Schefold: Xenophons Oikonomikos: Der Anfang welcher Wirtschaftslehre?, in: V. Caspari/B. Schefold (eds.): Beiträge zur ökonomischen Dogmengeschichte, Darmstadt 2004, 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheidel/von Reden (2002) W. Scheidel/S. von Reden (eds.): The Ancient Economy, Edinburgh 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scherf (2011) W. Scherf: Öffentliche Finanzen. Einführung in die Finanzwissenschaft, Konstanz 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt (1980) K. Schmidt: Grundprobleme der Besteuerung, in: F. Neumark (ed.): Handbuch der Finanzwissenschaft, Tübingen 1980, 120–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt-Hofner (2016) S. Schmidt-Hofner: Das Klassische Griechenland. Der Krieg und die Freiheit, München 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitz (1995b) W. Schmitz: Reiche und Gleiche. Timokratische Gliederung und Demokratische Gleichheit der athenischen Bürger im 4. Jahrhundert v. Chr., in: W. Eder (ed.): Die athenische Demokratie im 4. Jahrhundert v. Chr. Vollendung oder Verfall einer Verfassungsform?, Stuttgart 1995, 573–597.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitz (1997) W. Schmitz: s. v. eisphora, DNP 3 (1997), 930–931.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitz (2013) W. Schmitz: s. v. eisphora, EAH 5 (2013), 2344–2345.

    Google Scholar 

  • B. Schneider (1985) B. Schneider: August Boeckh. Altertumsforscher, Universitätslehrer und Wissenschaftsorganisator in Berlin des 19. Jahrhunderts. Ausstellung zum 200. Geburtstag, Berlin 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  • H. Schneider (1989) H. Schneider: August Boeckh, in: M. Erbe (ed.): Berlinische Lebensbilder, Berlin 1989, 37–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • H. Schneider (1990) H. Schneider: Die Bücher-Meyer-Kontroverse, in: W. M. Calder/A. Demandt (eds.): Eduard Meyer, Leiden 1990, 417–445.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scholz (2008) P. Scholz: Die ‚Macht der Wenigen‘ in den hellenistischen Städten, in: H. Beck/P. Scholz/U. Walter (eds.): Die Macht der Wenigen. Aristokratische Herrschaftspraxis, Kommunikation und ‚edler‘ Lebensstil in Antike und Früher Neuzeit, HZ Beiheft 47, München 2008, 71–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scholz (2009) P. Scholz: Der ‘gute’ Bürger in Lykurgs Rede gegen Leokrates, in: C. Mann/M. Haake/R. von den Hoff (eds.): Rollenbilder in der athenischen Demokratie, Wiesbaden 2009, 171–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schömann (1855) G. F. Schömann: Griechische Alterthümer, 2 vols., Berlin 1855.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schorn (2006) S. Schorn: Zur Authentizität und Datierung von Xenophons Poroi, WJA 30 (2006), 25–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schorn (2011) S. Schorn: Xenophons Poroi als philosophische Schrift, Historia 60 (2011), 65–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schorn (2012) S. Schorn: The Philosophical Background of Xenophon’s Poroi, in: C. Tuplin/F. Hobden (eds.): Xenophon, Leiden/Boston 2012, 689–724.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter (1918) J. A. Schumpeter: Die Krise des Steuerstaates (1918), reprint in: J. A. Schumpeter: Aufsätze zur Soziologie, Tübingen 1953, 1–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schütrumpf (1987) E. Schütrumpf: Xenophon Poroi. Vorschläge zur Beschaffung von Geldmitteln oder Über die Staatseinkünfte, Einleitung, krit. Textausgabe, Übersetzung und Anmerkungen, Texte zur Forschung 38, Darmstadt 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwahn (1931) W. Schwahn: Die Xenophontischen Póroi und die athenische Industrie im vierten Jahrhundert, RhM 80 (1931), 253–278.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sealey (1993) R. Sealey: Demosthenes and His Time, New York 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silver (2003) M. Silver: Review of W. Scheidel/S. Sitta von Reden (eds.): The Ancient Economy, Edinburgh 2002, EH.net 2003 (http://eh.net/book_reviews/the-ancient-economy/)

  • Silverman (1994) D. L. Silverman: The Trierarchy and Athenian Civic Identity, Diss. University of California at Berkeley 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spielvogel (2001) J. Spielvogel: Wirtschaft und Geld bei Aristophanes. Untersuchungen zu den ökonomischen Bedingungen in Athen im Übergang vom 5. zum 4. Jahrhundert. v. Chr., Frankfurt a. M. 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spina (1980/81) L. Spina: Poesia e retorica contro Leocrate, AFLN 23 (1980/81), 17–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tchernetska et al. (2007) N. Tchernetska/C. Austin/E. W. Handley/L. Horváth: New Readings in the Fragment of Hyperides’ Against Timandros from the Archimedes Palimpsest, ZPE 162 (2007), 1–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Too (2009) Y. L. Too: The Rhetoric of Identity in Isocrates. Text, Power, Pedagogy, Cambridge Classical Studies, Cambridge 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  • Touloumakos (1967) J. Touloumakos: Der Einfluss Roms auf die Staatsform der griechischen Stadtstaaten des Festlandes und der Inseln im ersten und zweiten Jhdt. v. Chr., Göttingen 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trevett (1992) J. Trevett: Apollodoros. The Son of Pasion, Oxford 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  • Unholtz (2011) J. Unholtz: Der Oikos-Vorstand als Entrepreneur. Gewinnträchtige Praxis in Xenophons Oikonomikos, in: P. Seele (ed.): Ökonomie, Politik und Ethik in der praktischen Philosophie der Antike, Berlin 2011, 49–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Usher (2002) S. Usher: Greek Oratory. Tradition and Originality, Oxford 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Groningen/Wartelle (1968) B. A. van Groningen/A. Wartelle: Aristote. Économique, Paris 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veyne (1976) P. Veyne: Le pain et le cirque. Sociologie historique d’un pluralisme politique, Paris 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Victor (1983) U. Victor: [Aristoteles], “Oikonomikós”, Beiträge zur Klassischen Philologie 147, Königstein am Taunus 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vielberg (1991) M. Vielberg: Die religiösen Vorstellungen des Redners Lykurg, RhM 134 (1991), 49–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • von der Lieck (1933) K. von der Lieck: Die xenophontische Schrift von den Einkünften, Diss. Köln 1933.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner-Hasel (2011) B. Wagner-Hasel: Die Arbeit des Gelehrten. Der Nationalökonom Karl Bücher (1847–1930), Frankfurt a. M./New York 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walter (1996) U. Walter: Common Sense und Rhetorik. Isokrates – Verteidigung der politischen Kultur, GWU 47 (1996), 434–440.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walter (2003) U. Walter: Isokrates metanóôn? Traditionen athenischer Außen- und Kriegspolitik bei Isokrates, in: W. Orth (ed.): Isokrates, Trier 2003, 78–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warnke (1987) C. Warnke: Warum hat August Boeckh die „Staatshaushaltung der Athener“ geschrieben? Wissenschaftshistorische Fakten und Überlegungen, Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin 36 (1987), 34–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber (1907/8) M. Weber: Agrarverhältnisse im Altertum (1907/8), in: J. Conrad/L. Elster/W. Lexis/E. Loening (eds.): Handwörterbuch der Staatswissenschaften, Jena 1909, 52–188 (reprint in: MWG I 6: Zur Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte des Altertums. Schriften und Reden 1893–1908, ed. by J. Deininger, Tübingen 2006, 320–747).

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber (1917) M. Weber: Rußlands Übergang zur Scheindemokratie, Die Hilfe. Wochenschrift für Literatur, Politik und Kunst, hrsg. von Friedrich Naumann, 23. Jg., Nr. 17 vom 26. April 1917, 272–279 (reprint in: MWG I 15: Zur Politik im Weltkrieg: Schriften und Reden 1914–1918, ed. by W. J. Mommsen, Tübingen 1984, 238–260).

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber (1922a) M. Weber: Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, Grundriss der Sozialökonomik Abt. III, 4. Lieferung, Tübingen 1922, 603–612 und 642–817 (reprint in MWG I 22-4: Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Die Wirtschaft und die gesellschaftlichen Ordnungen und Mächte. Nachlass. Teilband 4: Herrschaft, ed. by E. Hanke, Tübingen 2005, 117–716).

    Google Scholar 

  • Weissenberger (1987) M. Weißenberger: Die Dokimasiereden des Lysias (orr. 16, 25, 26, 31), Beiträge zur Klassischen Philologie 182, Frankfurt a. M. 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weissenberger (2003) M. Weißenberger: Lysias 1905–2000, Lustrum 45 (2003), 7–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitehead (2000) D. Whitehead: Hypereides. The Forensic Speeches, Oxford/New York 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitehead (2006) D. Whitehead: Absentee Athenians. Lysias Against Philon and Lycurgus Against Leocrates, MH 63 (2006), 132–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiemer (2010a) H.-U. Wiemer: Review of S. Carlsson: Hellenistic Democracies. Freedom, Independence and Political Procedure in Some East Greek City-states, Stuttgart 2010, in: sehepunkte 10 (2010), Nr. 9, 15.09.2010, http://www.sehepunkte.de/2010/09/16103.html.

  • Wiemer (2010b) H.-U. Wiemer: Review of V. Grieb: Hellenistische Demokratie. Politische Organisation und Struktur in freien griechischen Poleis nach Alexander dem Großen, Historia ES199, Stuttgart 2008, HZ 290 (2010), 743–744.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilcken (1901) U. Wilcken: Zu den pseudo-aristotelischen Oeconomica, Hermes 36 (1901), 188–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilhelm (1934) A. Wilhelm: Untersuchungen zu Xenophons Poroi, WS 52 (1934), 18–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • W. Will (2013) W. Will: Demosthenes, Darmstadt 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  • J. M. Williams (1987) J. M. Williams: The Peripatetic School and Demetrius of Phalerum’s Reforms in Athens, AncW 15 (1987), 87–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • P. Wilson (2008) P. Wilson: Costing the Dionysia, in: M. Revermann/P. Wilson (eds.): Performance, Iconography, Reception, Oxford 2008, 88–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wörrle/Zanker (1995) M. Wörrle/P. Zanker (eds.): Stadtbild und Bürgerbild im Hellenismus, München 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  • Worthington (1992) I. Worthington: A Historical Commentary on Dinarchus. Rhetoric and Conspiracy in Later Fourth-century Athens, Ann Arbor 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  • Worthington (1994) I. Worthington: The Canon of the Ten Attic Orators, in: I. Worthington (ed.): Persuasion, London/New York 1994, 244–263.

    Google Scholar 

  • Worthington (1999) I. Worthington: Greek Orators II: Dinarchus, Hyperides, Warminster 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  • Worthington (2000) I. Worthington (ed.): Demosthenes. Statesman and Orator, London 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • Worthington (2007) I. Worthington (ed.): A Companion to Greek Rhetoric, Oxford 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Worthington/Cooper/Harris (2001) I. Worthington/C. R. Cooper/E. M. Harris: Dinarchus, Hyperides, and Lycurgus, The Oratory of Classical Greece 5, Austin 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yun-Casalilla (2012) B. Yun-Casalilla: Introduction: The Rise of the Fiscal State in Eurasia From a Global, Comparative and Transnational Perspective, in: B. Yun-Casalilla/P. O’Brien (eds.): The Rise of Fiscal States, New York 2012, 1–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zoepffel (2006) R. Zoepffel: Aristoteles, Oikonomika. Schriften zu Hauswirtschaft und Finanzwesen, übers. und erl. von R. Zoepffel, Aristoteles. Werke in deutscher Übersetzung 10.2, Berlin 2006.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Alte Geschichte, Universität Bielefeld, Bielefeld, Germany

    Dorothea Rohde

Authors
  1. Dorothea Rohde
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Rohde, D. (2023). Introduction. In: From Deliberative Democracy to Consent Democracy. Palgrave Macmillan, Stuttgart. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-476-05921-5_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-476-05921-5_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Stuttgart

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-476-05920-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-476-05921-5

  • eBook Packages: HistoryHistory (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation